State v. McKinsey

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

 v.

Marty Craig McKinsey, Appellant,

Appeal From Marion County
Honorable R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-193
Submitted February 2, 2009 Filed May 6, 2009   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, of Columbia; and Solicitor Edgar Lewis Clements, III, of Florence, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Marty Craig McKinsey appeals his murder conviction and life sentence.  He contends the trial court erred in allowing a witness to testify about passing a polygraph test.  In his pro se brief McKinsey argues: (1) the trial court erred in failing to provide him an expert witness; (2) he was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to trial by a fair and impartial jury because the trial court failed to excuse a juror who worked with the State's star witness; and (3) he received ineffective assistance of counsel.  After a thorough review of the record, counsel's brief, and McKinsey's pro se brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.